Should we do Anatolianism, Turkishism, or patriotism?

6 August 1071/1922 is extremely important for Turkish history, in the first one, Sultan Alparslan won the Manzikert Victory and Anatolia became a "Turkelian". In the second time, the Turkish Army under the leadership of Gazi Mustafa Kemal launched the Great Offensive in Dumlupınar. The day these lines were written; In other words, the Battle of the Commander-in-Chief was won on August 30. It was the turning point of the National Struggle with the Sakarya Pitched Battle, which started a year ago, on August 23, 1921, and resulted in victory on September 13, in fact, "The withdrawal, which started in Vienna on September 13, 1683, is the symbol of stopping it in Sakarya after 238 years.

These two victories are the result of the continuity in the Turkish state tradition and the intelligence of the staff. With the first, Anatolia was made a homeland, with the second, the invasion attempts of the imperialist powers were repulsed a thousand years later and the foundations of the Republic of Turkey were laid as a new state. I shared these issues with the readers in an article titled "Reading Manzikert and the Great Offensive Victories in the Context of the Domestication of Anatolia and the Anatolian Renaissance". There, we emphasized that the political and intellectual foundations of this state were already laid as of 1906/8, that it tried the first two of the Three Styles of Politics (Ottomanism, Islamism and Turkism), and that the Turkish Republic was established by putting Turkism in the center.

The founding mind of the new state made Anatolia a homeland, determined its physical and political borders and placed it at the center of Turkish national identity. Anatolianism, also called Turkishism, Homelandism, Little Turkism, offered a nationalism in accordance with real-politics in order to avoid the risks posed by the surrealist Turkism/Turanism doctrine and the official nationalism/Anatolian secularism, didactic information was also given. I did not say that the article is Nurettin Topçu-centered and that the emphasis of 1071/1922 should not go away, and that the imagination of « Turkeyism » is centered on the Turkish Hearth.

Nationalist/Conservative Anatolianism: Belonging Through Lineage/Race and Reason/Religion

It is a doctrine that tries to eliminate the blocking points of the Three Styles of Politics. Its historical foundations are seen in Ali Fuad Başgil, Hilmi Ziya Ülken, Erol Güngör, Mümtaz Turhan, Peyami Safa, Remzi Oğuz Arık and Nureddin Topçu. These local/national thinkers are Cevaz Şakir, Azra Erhat, Vedat Günyol, who claim that Anatolia consists of purely secular-Western culture, possessing both the national and religious background of Anatolia and the universal philosophical background of humanity. They have a different conception from the Anatolian doctrine.

If I were to base it on Ibn Khaldun, these elite intelligences are the ontological and physical; that is, they pay utmost attention to keep together the element of reason, which expresses the epistemic features that show how belonging, belief and spirit are formed together with the element of lineage/ancestry.

At this point, one of the best examples of the unity of Reason (Islam) and Nesep (Turkishness/nationalism) is M. Şemsettin Günaltay, who was a prime minister in the Anatolian school. In his book, Maziden Atiye, he focused on the relationship between Turks (lineage) and Islam (reasons) and examined the superior position of the Turks in the history of Islam. According to him, for the awakening of Anatolian Turks to be successful, a national Islamic spirit must be a factor in the elimination of historical and social deterioration. A national Islamic spirit, as stated by Günaltay, who has an important place in the development of the founding philosophy, is still the phenomenon we most need today. The reading, which aimed to reproduce the spirit of its establishment, was made seriously in 1906/8, taking the geographical place (Turkey) as the center from which the new state took its name.

Being unaware of these negotiations, he saw the work as new, unspoken words and said, "To what extent does our society need a new upper identity?" criticisms are made. However, when we try to analyze the ideas by establishing a connection with the events, if we forget the historical basis of the search for solutions to the problems experienced, the risk of making the same mistakes again increases. The expressions of marginalization and exclusion increase and we enter a vicious circle again.

In 1906, with the determination of Şükrü Hanioğlu, who criticizes the ignorance of this, in this period when histories were seen as a serious virtue, he gave his head to Dr. A group of Ottoman intellectuals, attracted by Abdullah Cevdet Bey, emerged with the thesis that the "Ottoman" upper identity should be changed. Instead of the "Ottoman" super identity, the concepts of "Turkish" and "from Turkey" were proposed as alternatives, and more importantly, it was emphasized that they were not different from each other.

This is to say that national and religious values ​​have been tied since the establishment of the New State. As a matter of fact, no matter how different the philosophical schools and influences of the intellectuals who united around the Dergah magazine, which started to be published in the most enthusiastic period of the Kuvayi Milliye; they were united around two basic elements: to oppose a Gokalpist Great Turkism/Turanism, which they thought would lead to results contrary to real politics; To develop an Anatolian-centered religious and philosophical conception of nationalism united on the front of the War of Independence.

In this sense, Anatolianism At the beginning of the state-building process, at a time when collective identity studies were intense, it is an intellectual movement that tries to identify the concept of "Turk", which is determined as the upper identity, with living in Anatolia and being Muslim, and in this sense, it is almost an answer to Turanism. Anatolianism; In reaction to Turanism and Great Turkism, Minor Turkism and "Turkishism" are also called Homelandism.

This is probably why, as Kemal Karpat puts it, Anatolianism is related to the Three Styles of Politics (Westernism, Islamism and Turkism), which still makes itself felt in every political party as the deep currents of Turkish political life, and it is claimed to be the synthesis or antithesis of these currents. is a current. This is normal, because it is an example of Western-style nationalism, which is based on land, with its critique of the Three Styles of Politics. It can be said that the doctrine of Anatolianism, which is also called Turkishism, Anatolian Turks Nationalism, Homelandism, is a new beginning and a new solution proposal in the first quarter of the 20th century. Because;

Determination of Anatolian Turk as a collective name;
The belief that Turks migrated to Anatolia from Central Asia as a common ancestry myth and that Islamization of this geography,
1071 Manzikert, as a joint victory
Anatolia, oppressed and victimized as shared pain and shared historical moments,
Distinction between Turkism/Turanism and Turkism/Turkishism

The official discourse of the Republic of Turkey is clearly a cultural and spatial Anatolian nationalism by Gazi Mustafa Kemal in Nutuk, and it defines national belonging within existing borders. This vision of nationalism is the second of the six arrows that are the symbol of the CHP. Conservative, nationalist Anatolian conception is an unofficial and oppositional doctrine, and its separation from official and other nationalist/Anatolian and Turanist teachings dates back to the early periods of the Republic. In fact, this issue was clarified in the Turkish Hearth Congress dated 14/6/1918 with the separation of Great Turkism, Turanism and Small Turkism, and Turkishism. If we give the determinations of Tuğrul Kormaz;

Halide Edip (Adıvar) started negotiation with the article "Let's Look at Our House: The Field of Activity of Turkism" in Vakit newspaper dated 30/6/1918.
Ziya Gökalp wrote the article "Turkism-Turkishism" in Yeni Mecmua dated 4/7/1918. According to him, while Turkish denotes nationality, the term Turk denotes "hars". Explain the common and different points between the two.
Köprülüzade Mehmet Fuat wrote the articles “Turkism Aims” on 16/7/1918, and Ahmet Ağaoğlu wrote the articles named “Turkism and Turkism” in Tercüman-ı Adalet Newspaper dated 19/8/1918. Ağaoğlu said that Halide Edip was once a Turancı.
Halide Edip responded to this with the article "There is No Turkishness" in the Vakit Newspaper dated 23/8/2016. He stated that he did not give up on Turkism and Turanism and tried to reach his goal from different streets.
Due to the principle of Barika-i Fikir Müsadem-i Efkardır, that is, the sparks of truth emerge from the clash of ideas, these articles, which are still up-to-date, can be republished in a book or piecemeal in Türk Yurdu journal by Türk Ocağı officials. Thus, the probability of being bitten again through the same hole is reduced. In this context, I would like to present to your appreciation the end of the article titled "Reading Manzikert and the Great Offensive Victories in the Context of the Domestication of Anatolia and the Anatolian Renaissance":

In my opinion, Gökalp may have wanted to emphasize the ancient tradition before the Seljuk and the Ottoman Empire as a distant target with the idea of ​​Turan, and not neglect to seek intellectual, economic and political alliances with other existing Turkish States. Could this period have been seen as surrealist by our other scholars? As can be understood from the statements of Halide Edip in her last article, it does not seem so.

This may be necessary in terms of its priority in order to avoid the fact that it is not suitable for the current realpolitik and to avoid multiplying possible problems, and to provide the political, intellectual and economic grounding of the newly established state. However, this utopia does not consider it surrealist to consider resurrecting our historical and cultural foundations and establishing umbrella partnerships with countries with common cause and lineage as a distant goal. In this sense, utopia, as it is said, is not a dream country, not chasing after the impossible, but to continue living as a close goal without giving up on your basic premises, despite all the negativities, and to protect your distant goals. First of all, I have to make my home, homeland, Anatolia calm and peaceful so that you can contribute to my neighbors and brothers is different, it is different to see it as a surrealist. As a matter of fact, the founding elite, who is aware of this, shows the symbolic value of the intellectual and political continuity of its historical foundations. The reason why the number of states here is 16 and why some of the states that were established are not in the Presidency is the subject of a separate article to be studied with historians.

Conclusion

The important thing is; on the day of the victory of Malazgirt, 26 August 1071, the victory of the Great Offensive launched against the imperialist occupying forces on August 30, is the foundation of the New Turkish Republic. As the poet Ceyhun Atuf Kansu, who wrote the Sakarya Epic, said, "The Rose of the Independent" will never fade.

(For reference, see Tuğrul Korkmaz, Nationalism and Anatolianism in Typological and Theoretical Context, a book, Ankara.2016;  Hilmi  Ziya Ülken, History of Contemporary Thought in Turkey, İstanbul. 1975; Mevlüt Uyanık,  Salafism,  Arab Spring and Turkey, Ankara, 2016)       Corum; August 30, 2017; 19:19